1. CNI Spring Task Force Meeting | April 7, 2009 EthicShare: A Model for Virtual Research Communities Frazier Benya, Center for Bioethics, U of MN John Riedl, Computer Science, U of MN John T. Butler, University of Minnesota Libraries Kate McCready, University of Minnesota Libraries

2. EthicShare Project Staff: Principal Investigators: Wendy Pradt Lougee (Uof MN Libraries) Jeffrey Kahn (U of MN Center for Bioethics) & John Riedl (U of MN Computer Science) Project Director : Kate McCready (U of MN Libraries) Technology Lead: John Butler (U of MN Libraries) Collections : Cecily Marcus (U of MN Libraries) & Frazier Benya (U of MN Center for Bioethics, grad student); Stephen Hearn Developers: Chad Fennell (U of MN Libraries), David Naughton (U of MN Libraries), Bill Tantzen ( U of MN Libraries) & Tony Lam (U of MN Computer Science grad student)

3. EthicShare in a Nutshell Online research environment for information discovery and collaboration for practical ethics scholars and students Based at: the University of Minnesota's Center for Bioethics, Libraries, and Department of Computer Science & Engineering Funded by the Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and the National Science Foundation, Council on Library and Information Resources

4. EthicShare Framework

5. EthicShare Partnerships Data: National Library of Medicine - PubMed & Catalog data OCLC – WorldCat data Network Services: OCLC – Registry Services University Centers: Georgetown University – Bioethics Thesaurus Governance and Presentations at Societies by Partners from: University of Virginia, Indiana University- Bloomington, Indiana University-Purdue University, Indianapolis and Stanford University

6. EthicShare Development History 2004 Scholarly Communications Institute: Held at the Council on Library and Information Resources for Bioethicists. (Background – Bioethics Scholars are primarily humanities faculty (philosophy, theology) but the field also pulls from law, policy, medicine and public health.) 2005-2006 U of M Libraries Research: Studied the research behaviors and methodologies of scholars in the humanities and social sciences Identified “gaps” in the research process What solutions would support the advancement of a field? Would collaborative tools serve the needs of serious scholars? “Helping Hands” project: NSF funded U of MN - Computer Science and Bioethics exploring how to encourage participation in collaborative tools.

7. EthicShare Development History 2006-2007 EthicShare Planning Project: Assessment of a field Site visits and surveys Prototype of site 2008-2009 EthicShare Pilot Project: Build a “collection” of high quality, focused materials aggregated from a variety of source material providers Development of a community-supported environment Engage the community in the development process Developing process and technology models for the development of virtual research community environments.

8. Initial Tool and Feature Selection Planning Grant: Identifying and tuning collaborative technologies for a specific community of researchers How do you know what you don’t know? Bioethics Scholars didn’t use collective work sites or technologies. Held 5 site visits – U of Minnesota University of Indiana University of Indiana – Purdue University – Indianapolis University of Virginia Georgetown University

9. Site Visits – Early 2007 Presentation of Social Features ‐ EthicShare team created a presentation of successful web-based tools and features from various sites for bioethics faculty and graduate students to see. Discussion of Features ‐ During and after the presentations we discussed the reaction of these features and the idea of implementing them within the bioethics community Survey of Interest/Knowledge ‐ Asked the participants to complete a 10 minute survey at the end of this presentation to formalize their opinions.

10. http://www.citeulike.org/

14. http://www.youtube.com

16. EthicShare Survey Summary Report “Social” features weren’t “very important” but rated well when “somewhat important”, “important” and “very important” were totaled: ‐ Get Updates via Email/RSS about New Content (77%) ‐ Get Recommendations of Resources (68%) ‐ Ability to Share Your Work With your Colleagues (76%) ‐ Ability to Review a Resources (79%) ‐ Community Discussion Space (79%) ‐ Add Resources to the Site (71%)

17. Engage and Evaluate - Iterative Design Beta Testing - Feedback Loops

18. Engage and Evaluate - Iterative Design EthicShare Site Demo

32. U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA Altruism, Selfishness, and Contribution on the Social Web GroupLens Research University of Minnesota John Riedl

33. U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA Bowling Alone (Amazon reviews)

34. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 34 Messages Community-maintained Artifacts of Lasting Value Key Research Challenges o Attract contributions o Maintain quality o Achieve agreement

35. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 35 Tags scale: Library of Congress: 20M books in 200 years. www.librarything.com: 22M books in 3 years. Tag draw relevance from “the wisdom of crowds” Tags scale: Library of Congress: 20M books in 200 years. www.librarything.com: 22M books in 3 years. Tag draw relevance from “the wisdom of crowds”

36. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 36 Tag Selection Algorithms “The Quest for Quality Tags” S. Sen, F. Harper, A. LaPitz, J. Riedl GROUP 2007

37. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 37 RQ: How can a tagging system show users tags they want to see?

38. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 38 Tag Prediction Random baseline: 21% Implicit features: number of applications (39%) number of users (51%) number of searches for a tag (44%) number of users who searched for a tag (48%) length of tag (42%) Moderation-based features: global average rating for a tag (59%) user-normalized global average rating for a tag (62%) tag reputation (57%) Hybrid combinations: logistic regression, decision trees (67%)

39. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 39 Research Questions Can folksonomy be encouraged? o Showing users more tags leads to more vocabulary reuse o How much convergence is valuable?

40. U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA Motivating Participation by Displaying the Value of Contribution Rashid, Ling, Tassone, Resnick, Kraut, Riedl CHI 2006, Montréal

41. U NIVERSITY OF M INNESOTA

42. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 42 What Theory Tells Us… Collective Effort Model o People will contribute more if:  They believe their effort is important to the group  They like the group Smaller is Better o Slovic, Fischhoff, & Lichtenstein, 1980 o People feel greater concern when the reference group they’re part of grows smaller. Specificity Matters o Small & Loewenstein, 2003 o Specific identity of those helped is important in drawing people’s support.

43. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 43 VOICE 2 Screen shot Numerical values are represented by smilies Who the contribution helps Value of each contribution

44. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 44 Results Want Smilies on the regular interface? Self-report Self 3.87 All MovieLens 3.13 Similar Group 2.97 Dissimilar Group 2.94 Control 2.68 Probability of rating a movie Behavioral data Self 7.2% All MovieLens 10.2% Similar Group 15.8% Dissimilar Group 5.9% Control 7.4%

45. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 45 Altruism, Selfishness, and Contribution on the Social Web GroupLens Research University of Minnesota John Riedl

46. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 46 Adoption & Sustainability

47. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 47 Community/User Engagement Economic structure and strategies Technology framework Sustainable: valued, reliable, and persistent Adoption & Sustainability

48. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 48 Rogers, then Moore

49. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 49

50. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 50 Sustainability – Economic Structure Economically sustainable academic resources require: ‐ Recognition of benefits ‐ Incentives for decision-makers to act ‐ Selection ‐ Efficiency ‐ Appropriate organization and governance -- Brian Lavoie (Blue Ribbon Task Force on Sustainable Digital Preservation and Access)

51. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 51 Sustainability – Economic Framework Recognition of benefits: Articulate benefits  cultivate sense of value  willingness to pay Incentives for decision-makers to act: Appropriate incentives  ongoing willingness to provide Selection: Effective/reliable delivery  predictability Efficiency: Efficient use of resources  productive use of resources Appropriate organization and governance: Organization/governance  trusted resource

52. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 52 Sustainability – Possible Economic Strategies A. University of Minnesota Hosting & Supporting Focus area for libraries – foster virtual research communities (AgEcon, HarvestChoice, EthicShare) B. Professional Societies Partner with the professional societies to get support. Hosting and operational support would remain at the University (distributed editorial model) C. Institutional Memberships – Centers 75 Center for Bioethics – provide support D. Institutional Memberships – Libraries Libraries purchase subscriptions similarly to other indexes. E. Advertisements Can “scholarly” coexist with advertisements?

53. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 53 Sustainability – Technology Framework Sources citations images videos Drupal site framework social features ETL harvesting materials de-duplication

54. Adaptive Hypermedia 2008 54 Collections: Expand the Index (info, people, tools) Capture of Community’s Fugitive Content Gray Literature Contributions Digital Collections (OAI-harvests), media Curricular Materials/ Learning Objects Site Features: Recommenders “Classics” Lists Bioethics Policy Development Support Release the VRC Technology Stack and Development Model EthicShare … the future

55. Coalition for Networked Information | April 7 2009 Thank You!

56. Coalition for Networked Information | April 7 2009 John Riedl - reidl@umn.edureidl@umn.edu Frazier Benya - benya004@umn.edubenya004@umn.edu John Butler - j-butl@umn.eduj-butl@umn.edu Kate McCready - mccre008@umn.edumccre008@umn.edu EthicShare Site: http://www.ethicshare.orghttp://www.ethicshare.org Background: http://www.lib.umn.edu/about/ethicsharehttp://www.lib.umn.edu/about/ethicshare